Retroficiency offers prospective clients a trial: A company that is considering whether to use the solution identifies a building for which Retroficiency generates an audit report with efficiency recommendations. The prospective client can then review that report against its own data on the building. Fisher said Jones Lang LaSalle wouldn't have become a client, if Retroficiency hadn't passed the test.
Retroficiency recently published a study after assessing more than 80 million square feet of buildings, by leveraging team members' experience and data drawn from other sources.
Chief among the findings:
- Energy savings opportunities vary greatly across a portfolio of buildings, so companies should focus on prioritizing buildings instead of investing in deep assessments of buildings that may not offer up big savings;
- Traditional metrics don't always correlate to potential savings. "People tend to prioritize their building portfolio according to an EnergyStar score, but a score of 60 does not necessarily mean it has more savings potential," explained Mike Kaplan, vice president of marketing at Retroficiency. "Many think 'I am 25 percent less efficient and I have the opportunity to save 25 percent from that building' but that's not true."
- Don't overlook smaller, older buildings in favor of large ones, since smaller buildings often offer the best savings percentage.
- Look beyond lighting and heating, when it comes to retrofits. "We evaluate thousands of energy conservation measures and there are opportunities in ventilation and plug loads that are often missed," Kaplan said.
Fisher said the company has 17 employees and is growing rapidly. He shared some lessons learned from selling to big companies?
"The obvious one is that big companies take a lot of patience, the sales cycle is very long. Second, which was an eye opener for me is that there 25 potential sales to be made within any of these companies -- the groups are not always well connected and they don’t talk to each other, so we can have multiple sales from different divisions, because they have different pain points."